This edition explores key developments across India’s IP and regulatory landscape, including biotechnology patent guidelines, patent examination, trademark disputes, copyright damages, and online piracy.
It also highlights important corporate and legal developments concerning arbitration, factory safety, data protection, e-commerce regulations, GST classification, and POSH compliance, offering valuable insights for businesses and legal professionals navigating India’s evolving legal framework.
Latest IP Insights
India’s Draft Biotechnology Patent Guidelines 2026: What Innovators Need to Know
From gene editing to advanced biologics, biotechnology is testing the boundaries of patentability. India’s draft 2026 biotechnology patent guidelines address emerging technologies and examination issues relevant to pharma and biotech innovators. The proposals make this a timely moment for businesses to review patent claim drafting, technical disclosures and portfolio strategy. As the guidelines remain in draft form, their final shape and implementation will be important to watch.
Patent Refusals Must Be Reasoned, Not Merely Announced
A patent refusal needs more than a conclusion—it needs a clear explanation. The Madras High Court set aside a patent refusal after finding the reasoning on inventive step inadequate and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. The decision highlights the importance of reasoned examination, robust technical submissions and clear explanations of the inventive contribution claimed.
Patent Processing in India: Backlog, Bottlenecks & the Fast Lane
Could the right filing route save years? India’s latest patent office data points to a record clearance year followed by renewed pressure at the first-examination stage. Yet eligible applicants using expedited examination can achieve grant or final disposal in an average of about a year in most cases, compared with several years through the normal route.
Beer vs. Whisky: Delhi HC Restrains “Godfather” Whisky
Can two different alcoholic beverages still clash over the same brand? The Delhi High Court restrained Cartel Bros from manufacturing, marketing or selling whisky under “GODFATHER” or “GODFATHER’S”, finding a prima facie case in favour of Devans Modern Breweries.
Coined, Not Derived: The Limits of the Molecule-Based Defence
Can a pharmaceutical brand escape a trademark dispute because its name refers to an active ingredient? In Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories v. Razenta Pharmaceuticals, the Delhi High Court ordered cancellation of “DAPLOGIN”, finding it deceptively similar to the earlier mark “DAPLO”.
Film Copyright: ₹1.66 Crore in Damages Without Exact Proof of Loss
Must copyright owners quantify every rupee lost to infringement? The Bombay High Court’s Mumbai Bench awarded approximately ₹1.66 crore in copyright damages despite the absence of exact proof of loss. The ruling highlights that uncertainty over the precise quantum of damages need not defeat a claim where infringement and the fact of loss are established and a reasonable assessment can be made.
Digital Piracy: Chasing Streaming Sites That Keep Changing Masks
Take down one piracy site, and another may appear overnight. The Delhi High Court’s evolving approach to dynamic injunctions addresses the challenge of mirror, redirect and clone websites that facilitate continued copyright infringement. The development offers copyright owners a potentially more effective enforcement mechanism against constantly shifting online piracy networks, while raising important questions about implementation and judicial oversight.
Design Examination Reports Move to Email from 2 October 2026
A small procedural shift with potentially significant deadline consequences. India’s Designs Office has moved to email-based communication of First Examination Reports from 2 October 2026. Applicants and representatives should ensure that email addresses recorded in Form-1 are accurate, active and regularly monitored.
Patented Cancer Drugs: Can Public Health Override Patent Exclusivity?
When life-saving medicines become unaffordable, where does patent exclusivity stand? In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court interpreted Section 100 of the Patents Act broadly enough to permit government manufacture and non-commercial supply of patented medicines to needy patients. However, it stopped short of directing the Government to exercise that power, leaving the decision to executive policy and further assessment of affordability and access.
Latest Corporate Insights
MD as Occupier: Factory Accident Liability in India
Following the detention of a listed auto-firm’s Managing Director over a factory accident under the OSH Code, corporate boards face heightened scrutiny regarding statutory “occupier” liability. The OSH Code mandates that a non-independent director be designated as the occupier with ultimate control, binding personal safety duties directly to executive leadership.
India’s New E-Commerce Rules: What the Consumer Protection Rules, 2026 Mean for Platforms, Marketplaces and Sellers in India
Effective from 1 January 2027, the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Amendment Rules mandate a major overhaul of platform design and backend operations. The rules strictly regulate search rankings and sponsored listings, enforce a 30-day low-price benchmark for discounts, require annual dark-pattern audits, and restrict self-preferencing consumer data usage.
A Film Is Not Software: The Bombay High Court on GST Classification of Cinematographic Film Licensing in India
In Dharma Productions v. State of Maharashtra, the Bombay High Court ruled that cinematographic film licensing cannot be reclassified as “IT software” under GST simply because content is delivered digitally. Setting aside an erroneous tax demand, the Court emphasized that tax classification depends on the essential character of the supply rather than the mode of transmission, providing vital tax certainty for the media and entertainment sector.
Latest POSH Insights
POSH Act cannot be applied in a straightjacket manner- Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of India has taken an important step towards addressing sexual harassment complaints involving women advocates. In its order dated September 18, 2026 the Court observed that the POSH Act 2013 cannot be applied in a straightjacket manner to women in the legal profession and called for a common regulatory framework for courts, tribunals and other quasi-judicial forums
Can fear of sexual harassment extend the POSH Limitation period?
Can compensation be enforced against an accused while his statutory appeal against the Internal Committee’s findings is still pending? The Madhya Pradesh High Court has set aside a ₹35 lakh compensation order, holding that a pending appeal under Section 18 of the POSH Act must be adjudicated first. The judgment reinforces that the right to appeal under the POSH Act is a substantive statutory safeguard, and not a mere procedural formality.
Delhi High Court’s Message on Confidentiality under the POSH framework
In an age where a single online publication can lead to widespread and permanent circulation of sensitive information, confidentiality cannot end with the conclusion of an inquiry or a legal proceeding. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma questioned how the survivor’s identity could be revealed in an official government publication and sought details of the officials responsible for its contents.